SHARE THIS SHOW:
ON THE BLOG:
RELATED CONVERSATIONS:
RECENTLY ON TOL:
TOL Our Town
- A tumblr site dedicated to the people and places that make up Oregon and Southwest Washington.
TAGS:
At the end of September The Oregonian announced a second round* of employee buyout packages in order to curb financial difficulties. On Wednesday, Oregonian executive editor Peter Bhatia released a memo pertaining to the reorganization of the newsroom, stating:
We are committed to keeping The Oregonian strong, both in print and online. It is important to understand that publishing a compelling newspaper is absolutely essential, even as we increase our presence on the Web and embrace the tools it offers us.
A world without newspapers is no longer unthinkable. These days, there are multiple websites dedicated to documenting the demise of the dailies nationwide. In March of this year, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer folded after 146 years in print, and numerous Northwest papers have cut staffers to stay afloat. Beyond the obvious struggles faced by any business forced to do more with less, however, newspapers' misfortunes are raising serious questions about the future of journalism as a whole.
As The Oregonian changes in size and structure, what are the implications for the media landscape across the state?
What do you see as the future of news? Is print media dying, or is it merely in a state of transition? What do you think about the major changes at the largest newspaper in the state? Where are you getting your news?
GUESTS:
- Peter Bhatia: Executive editor of The Oregonian
- Michelle Roberts: Former reporter for The Oregonian
- Morgan Holm: Vice President for News and Public Affairs at Oregon Public Broadcasting
- Stephen Engelberg: Managing Editor at ProPublica and former managing editor at The Oregonian
- Steve Forrester: Editor and publisher of The Daily Astorian and CEO of the East Oregonian Publishing Company
*Editor's note: This was the second round of buyouts this calendar year, the third in the last twelve months.
Photo credit: Per Foreby / Creative Commons
-
They have raised the price of the Sunday Oregonian from $1.50 last spring to $2.25 and now $2.50 and I am about to quit buying it. They are just too damn greedy. There is no way that rising gas prices justified that price rise. It just does not cost an additional dollar per paper to drive a truckload of papers across the pass to Bend.
Historically, newspapers made about 20% profit per year. Compare that to grocery stores at about 1 to 2 %, and most other businesses from 3 to 8 %. Newspapers have become a commodity and they are going to have to get used to making the profits of a commodity, about 2 to 3 %.
-
Talked to my parents last weekend and they told me that if someone from eastern oregon (pendleton and on) you have to drive to The Dalles at 2 am to get the oregonian.
-
Now perhaps a decade ago my students came home from Portland Public School and informed me that I had to subscribe to the Oregonian because their teacher required it for class. We strolled across the street to a friend's place and we pulled the days paper out of the recycle pile and I had my student sit and read the paper and write down the date stamp for every story that they recognized. In every case, simply by accessing the Web and listening to OPB/NPR they were a day, to days, ahead of the Oregonian. Those students still do not take the paper; that medium was out of date a decade ago.
My perspective has always been considering the column inches devoted to advertising, the Oregonian should be free.
No the newsprint media is an environmental impact that is easily avoided, and all together unnecessary! -
I’m an owner of the East Oregonian in Pendleton. The EO is part of a family-owned newspaper group, not associated with The Oregonian. But, we depend on The Oregonian to cover news of statewide importance. Local and regional newspapers like ours, especially in rural areas, just don’t have the resources to cover state politics. It’s important for Oregon to have a newspaper whose journalists are watchdogs over the state legislature. We hope The Oregonian’s reporters will embrace that role as they go through this upheaval.
Print journalism is definitely going through a major transition. Smaller community newspapers like the daily EO and our weekly newspapers are better off than the metro dailies — we don’t compete against TV news, so we are the main news source. But, we recognize that putting all our news on our web site and giving free access to it is not a sustainable business model. Many advertisers don't care about being on the web and don't want to pay to be there; they want the certainty of knowing their print ad will be in the hands of subscribers. Our challenge is the same as The Oregonian's — to keep our readers interested and engaged, so they continue their habit of picking up the newspaper every day.Kathryn B. Brown
-
I agree with Ms Brown that we need local and regional news sources. We subscribe to the daily Oregonian for local and state-wise news, including that from the legislature in Salem. We also pick up one of the weekly papers from time to time to get a different point of view. Most of the national and world news in the Oregonian comes from other news sources - the New York Times, Washington Post, LA Times, AP, etc., but is often reported in more detail than TV or radio news.
I would read the newspaper on line (I look through the NY Times and read their editorials every day), but I don't waste a lot of time with blogs for hard news. It's too hard to tell who is reporting facts and who is giving his or her opinion.
If local and regional newspapers can't raise enough money from local advertisers to function, they can't give away their product on the web. It will be instructive to watch how the Seattle paper does with its web-only news.
I'm looking forward to this discussion...
Patricia Oldham
-
I live in Portland and get the wkend package of the Oregonian. I look forward to getting the friday thru Sun. paper b/c those are the days i usually have time to sit and read the paper for 15 min. before running out the door. The sunday travel section is fun for me to read, i love the A & E section on friday which tells me what's goin on throughout NW oregon over the wkend, as well as info on new movies, new cafes and bars, etc. I also like the 'how we live' section for it's stories, the crossword, and a tiny bit of celebrity news.
I for one really hope that the Oregonian can stay in business, which is why I am subscribing even with the cost going up. I like the feel of the paper, turning the pages, cutting coupons, and spilling my coffee on it w/o worrying (not true with a computer news source!)
-
What do you read — online or off — from Monday through Thursday?
-
There is an inaccuracy, or at least something overlooked, in discussions about the demise or shrinkage of print media. It is not just that people are getting news online, but it is also because of globalization that people are not as interested in what occurs on a local level as they once were. When the entire world is open to you, when you have greater access to international affairs, you are simply less inclined to have an interest in what is happening around you---you also have less time for it. In some ways we now have international priorities rather then local priorities.
It is true people are now getting news online, but it is important to remember they are also getting different news online then they were before---they are not as interested in local news, because they have easy access to the affairs of the greater world. Of course if you live in New York city you may be a bit more interested in the local news, because the impact of local news has a higher priority then in other US cities. In many ways it is positive that we have an interest and a vehicle to broaden the geography of our news interests, but it also means our capacity to cover local news has been diminished. We have to wonder, as local coverage decreases, who will be left to conduct the checks and balances in our local communities? And, if this local scrutiny can ever be replaced?
-
It seems to me that the best thing to do is give up print and publish completely online. There is, of course, one problem with that: the Internet is not available to everyone, all the time, for a nominal fee.
One thing is for sure, we need to figure out a way to preserve true investigative journalism. Television "news" is pretty much off the rails. Aside from NPR, radio "news" is nothing but entertainment for your political leanings. The Internet has legitimate sources, Reuters, BBC, NPR, but the signal to noise ratio is way too low since every person with an opinion is calling themselves journalists these days.
I am not really concerned about losing newspapers as a print business. I am concerned about losing a standard of integrity. There are a lot of people taking up the task of local investigative journalism on the Internet. The problem is, it is hard to find them in the sea of crap. They need some banner like a newspaper lending them its credibility (and lawyers in most cases).
Finding a way to create that "banner" online and getting the Internet to everyone seem like the next big things we should be focusing on rather than trying to save print media.
-
Won't miss this corporate paper - or its slow, awful website - at all.
It's a total joke when Executive Editor Peter Bhatia claims to investigate the powerful; the Oregonian serves powerful interests, and broadcasts press releases from their advertisers and well-connected friends.
There are also recycled AP stories and articles from the New York Times that I've read several days before.
There are still plenty of great local "alternative" papers available throughout our state, reporting real news that matters.
-
i agree totally. it is a joke what he said....
-
The Oregonian is the incredible shrinking paper. I don't know how they can get any tighter or slimmer. Since we will get less news and it will sometimes be reported by interns, is the price going to drop since obviously the quality and quantity is going down.
-
I imagine Steve Forrester of the Daily Astorian might have some interesting comments on the power-serving instincts of the Oregonian with regards to the current North Coast battle over LNG...
-
i work for a small school and we used to get about 10 copies of the oregonian delivered each day. however, as everyone may be aware, they have raised their rates CONSIDERABLY, and they no longer gave us a school discount as they had in the past. we were no longer able to continue our subscription with the oregonian with our budget constraints. as another person has commented on here, many of the stories are just copied and pasted stories from the AP, Reuters, etc. and then a quick blurb added as to how it pertains to oregon.
i think it's just a sign of the times that newspapers in hard copy form are on there way out, and the oregonian is no different.
-
get the shareholders OUT! - the news media should not be wrapped up with the “entertainment/commercial” media - the news should not be a money-making affair -
news media are NOT a business like any other - they are more an integral part of a modern democracy than most, up there with the deliverers of correspondence, the libraries, the institutions which foster education ,i.e.: the sciences AND the liberal arts, as well, the police and fire departments, and other forces which secure us from enemies foreign, domestic, and/or ignorant. et cetera -
this is not a complete argument, as it was written in only a few minutes and i hope what it implies will be picked up for wider consideration
-
That is an interesting idea. I wonder how it would be financed, set up, run, and kept free of corrupting influences.
-
to the comment above:
how it would be set up, run, et c is what needs discussion and much thought given to, exactly the point - thank you
this idea that all in this country has to earn money for 'shareholders' or it is not worth the powder to blow it to H is a good portion of what will cause our attempt at self-rule to fail
DEMOCRACY CAN"T BE BOUGHT, but it can be sold out, sold down the river, et c
-
I read the Oregonian for nearly twenty years until, I think it was fall of 2008, when they included a DVD in the paper called "Obsession; Radical Islam's War Against the West". I believe the paper considered it "advertising" but they made a very poor choice in distributing such hate mongering inflammatory media. I canceled my subscription at that time and I've missed reading The Oregonian, in my opinion one of the best papers in this country, ever since.
-
I think it was great that the Oregonian published that DVD. Why wouldn't you want to learn more about the Islamist terrorist threat to this country, and to western civilization in general? You won't like it if the Taliban comes and stuffs you into a burka.
-
I gave up on the Oregonian long before this current economic crisis. Why? Content. The Oregonian had more advertising for department stores/cell phones/autos than actual news. And most of the international/nation news was from other sources. Business coverage was non-existant.
I opted for the print edition of the New York Times. Seven days a week. The Sunday times has more news than a month worth of the Oregonian.
Even today, the Sunday Oregonian boasts "$120 worth of coupons". What am I buying? Advertising or content?
Doug
-
As an educator, or a student, you can subscribe to the New York Times Monday through Friday for less than $10/month!
The Sunday Times adds a chunk of change. But at least there is excellent journalism here, not just advertising...
-
Governments have always subsidized newspapers by requiring that public notices and news of record be published in the paper with the largest local circulation. Police reports, real estate transactions, court affairs obits, etc. I think that should be changed and those government notices be put online. States, counties, and cities already have websites set up and it would be really easy and inexpensive to do.
Taxpayers will save money and smaller newspapers will benefit from not having to compete with the government subsidized larger papers.
People could even subscibe to emailed notices that their interests are updated.
-
Lights on -- cockroaches run... It's an old saying in Hawaii.
I fear that the loss of local investigative reporting is equvalent to turning the lights out on those who wield power over others. The metaphorical cockroaches will show no restraints -- be it in corporate governance, political governance, policing or other areas that impact our lives.
-
To those complaining about the Oregonian web site, I agree, but try using their RSS feeds. I use them to get the headlines with summaries and only go to the web page when I want to read an article. Cuts through the noise.
-
I agree. I'm the "Michael from Tigard" who called in to say that they ought to burn down the web site and start over.
Now that you clued me in, I'm going to try the RSS feed approach. But it's pathetic that their web site is so awful when there are numerous of examples of good web sites that they could look at and clone. And besides, the city is full of talented and currently underemployed web site designers.
I keep wondering what the deal is with the Oregonian and that OregonLive outfit. The Oregonian must've signed over their souls in blood to them.
-
I am 22 and an avowed newspaper reader. All of my friends think I'm crazy for paying! each month to receive the Oregonian when I could go online and get my information for free. For me, I love waking up and reading the paper with breakfast.
I grew up reading the Salt Lake Tribune, which has really gone downhill as they cut employees drastically. In my four years reading the Oregonian, I love it. I especially love the in-depth, investigative news reporting. I could get the fun sections from any news source online, but the in-depth and series reporting keeps me subscribing.
I hope the employee cuts don't damage the paper, but I can't see how less reporters can sustain the quality I have come to expect. Good luck!
Lizzie
-
The Oregonian "oregonlive" website clearly stinks - even long time readers and boosters of the paper agree on this point...
But now look at Peter Bhatia, telling us on air "oh no, it's good, and so very improved..."
Hmmm...real honest and accurate reporting, or a reflexive (or even contractually mandated) defense of a major corporate partner?
Exactly why we no longer subscribe
-
Mr. Bahtia should be more forthcoming about the web site. Advance Internet, the arm of Newhouse that manages the web site (and those of many other papers nationwide) has its origins as a sort of experiment to draw in advertising revenue. The people in charge of it have always been part of the advertising arm of Newhouse, not journalists; until that changes, I highly doubt there will be substantive change in the quality of the site that is meaningful to a news audience.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advance_Internet
-
Actually Pete, it's not true that the people in charge of OregonLive have *always* been part of the advertising arm of Newhouse. I must not have made that clear when we talked at length about OregonLive a few months ago.
While I can't speak to the current staff at all, I was OL's founding editor & had nothing to do with advertising. We had clear lines between advertising & editorial at the time.
I won't quibble about the need for 'substantive changes' to the site itself, though...!
-
Of course none of these concerns are explored in any depth during the "live," on air version of the show..!
Let's not pile on our good friends, eh?
-
Betsy, I apologize for the error -- I must have misunderstood!
Still, I would like to have heard more about their web plans on a program about the future of news...whether or not they have direct control, they have an enormous interest.
I believe their audience would like very much to have a clearer understanding of the Oregonian's vision for incorporating the web into their news product.
-
I gave up on The Oregonian years ago because the front page was so often trivial. The crowning moment was when the "lead" story on the front page (above the fold) was about Bumper Stickers. This is not what I deem investigative journalism.
Steve Talley
Portland.
-
The idea of exploiting unpaid interns as cheap labor is one of the sleaziest ideas in business. It is just doing an end run around labor laws about minimum wages.
-
What concerns me is complex topics like health care reform and climate change legislation might not be explored and explained fully due to the upheaval occurring in journalism.
There is further confusion because I can read hundreds of articles related to these topics on the Internet, but it can be difficult to discern opinion from fact. I have to spend a lot of time with further research to discover more truth.
I don't take the paper Oregonian mainly due to paper waste concerns. I also don't identify with the Oregonian's slant. I'm more interested in internatonal news, and the perspective that foreigners have on what occurs in the U.S.
-
>What concerns me is complex topics like health care reform and climate change legislation might not be explored and explained fully due to the upheaval occurring in journalism.
I'm not sure I would trust the Oregonian as a source on these topics. They don't have the news staff to cover big national or international stories well, even now. Pretty sure that a new staff of poorly paid interns won't help.
Most of the Oregonian's articles on health care, for example, are from wire services, or reprinted days later from The New York Times.
The Times, in contrast to the Oregonian, still practices excellent journalism, and has the experienced staff to do it well.
I am more than willing to pay for good journalism, which is why for national and international news we subscribe to the Times.
But the Oregonian is not worth it - I'll get my coupons online.
-
I agree wholeheartedly with the caller who complained about OregonLive. I use the website on a regular basis in my work. It sucks. The stories in the paper do not correlate with the stories on the Web. The website needs a major overhaul with the user in mind.
-
I applaud the O's move away from beats like City Hall. Too often, we readers have been broad-sided by issues that have been boiling in the community for months, e.g. Caesar Chavez street, only to hear about it as a significant story when it finally reaches City Hall. City Council actions are at the end of the process, not the middle. By time its on the council agenda, it's too late for citizens like me to become involved or to get a more balanced perception.
-
I love the Oregonian for the following, in no particular order:
1. Analysis of state-wide political races and ballot measures. There's really nowhere else to get this.
2. The Oregonian's main editorials, which are thoughtful and give me important information to help me understand important issues
3. Columnists, like Thomas Friedman
4. Reviews and articles about cultural events, such as the opera, first Thursday, theater, etc.
5. In-depth articles on important issues, such as the fate of salmon, taking down of dams, etc.
And I love being able to take the paper with me in the car, on the airplane or to bed.
It serves a very important function!
-
Friedman's in the Times (sometimes a day or two earlier...)
-
I like The Oregonian. It covers a wide range pretty well.
I don't like the Bend Bulletin, it is a very biased right wing propaganda organ, in my opinion.
-
I find the Oregonian confusing to read. The editorial stance is really wacky. LNG-Yes! Sam Adams, No! (recall). Whoever is really holding the reigns there, really needs to let go and let the editorial board do their jobs. I'm still holding a grudge that the O backed Bush. Also, the whole automotive section and much of the sports sections could go, if you asked me. I'd suggest News/Metro/Business and each day one of your other sections - Foodday, Arts & Liesure. But a whole section on cars? Also, the whole new thing "The Stump" - come look at these stories on-line... would rather see them in the paper, please. Thanks - I know it's not easy running a paper, and I've come to realize that the O is better than many, but with a little tweaking it could be even better. The website could also use help. Having searchable archives that go back as far as possible would help everyone.
Thanks!
-
They once published an editorial attacking the Massachusetts Supreme Court for upholding marriage equality.
I'm paraphrasing, but Bob Caldwell's essential argument was "gays and lesbians should be happy with their new found role in entertainment (I think he actually referenced "Will & Grace!") - and not get all uppity about civil rights."
-
I agree about the puzzling editorial stance. Calling on Sam Adams to resign before they, or the public, had the chance to even absorb the news??! Wacky!
Endorsing a candidate for HD 43 before the position was even open??! Even wackier!!
Some of their editorials are very useful, carefully considered and well written. Puzzling them out from the bizarre and ill-informed is a challenging task.
-
I guess it's all relative, but the quality of the oregonian is fairly poor. A good paper strives to be unbiased, rather than just claming to be. Particularly, the state political reporting is abysmal. Regardless of the content, most pieces are poorly written. I, for one, am not sorry to see them fall on hard times;
As a sidenote, I commend the Willamette Week for stepping up and filling the void when the Oregonian was soft pedaling the Goldschmidt Pedophilia Story as "an affair with a 14 year old"; Viewing an older man in power having sexual contact with a 14 year old as anything but a criminal act is disgusting. I boycotted the Oregonian, both print and on-line after that.
jeff
-
And don't forget Bob Packwood. "When it matters to Oregonians, it's in the Washington Post..."
-
As a long time regular subscriber to the Oregonian, I have a few observations. First, the paper is appears to be tightly intertwined with the Democrat power elite of Portland, Multnomah county, and the state. It was Willamette Week that broke the ugly story about Neil Goldschmidt. Many of your readers probably believe as I do that your paper chose not to investigate those terrible rumors over many years, thus allowing an un-indicted felon child molester to continue building a career as a powerful politician. Second, the "analysis" done by the paper is at its best when addressing sad stories of various "victims" of society; however, it gets painfully shallow in more difficult subjects such as why education in our state lags so many others. For instance why compare ourselves only to WA and CA? Why not vs. Germany and Japan? Third, too many of your articles are filled with the journalist's opinions. My wife and I sometimes make a sport of highlighting sentences for each other that express incredible bias or the presumption of a political ideology. We think that you are inbred ideologically that you no longer recognize an impartial point of view. Other than that I do enjoy reading the stories that catch my eye according to my schedule, unlike radio or TV.
I agree with one of the callers that the website is not very user friendly. I'll try it again, but after 5 or 6 sessions I saw no reason to go back.
-
Very well said - and I strongly agree with you on all three of your major points.
When I first moved here from Seattle 20 years ago - it really struck me that some articles on page 2, 3 or 4 expressed opinion very strongly and weren't on the editorial page. After a while, I suppose I became accustomed to it.
It was a big step down from the Seattle Times.
jeff
-
This isn't really about whether or not we like the Oregonian, that is besides the point. (Although I suppose if it was an amazing anomaly of quality things could be different.) The Oregonian isn't having problems because people don't like it. This problem is shared by most papers around the country because of the transformation in how we receive news, and the news we wish to receive. Of course the New York Times is fantastic and comparing it to a paper from a city the size of Portland, Oregon is more then a bit ridiculous.
-
But why buy the Oregonian, if it doesn't offer decent national, international - and now even statewide - news coverage? When it largely blasts press releases for corporate sponsors and advertisers? When the coupons aren't even that good?
I say go with the "fantastic" option.
-
I don't buy The Oregonian. I read the NYTimes, Harper's, The Economist and The New Yorker. My comment was meant to show, that The Oregonian is a decent enough paper considering the size of the city----and I am reasonable enough, not to list a litany of reasons I don't like it, considering those reasons are not relevant to why The Oregonian is having problems.
-
But if the Oregonian doesn't offer decent state, national or international coverage, and enjoys a comfortable relationship with corporate sponsors, usually echoing their interests...
...and if other sources (local and national) often report big Oregon stories (Goldschmidt, Packwood, etc.) first (and often because the Oregonian is working hard NOT to cover these stories)...
Then why buy - or defend - this shrinking paper, or visit its clunky, awful website - at all?
-
I don't buy The Oregonian or read it, because I don't think the quality of a paper from a city or state of this size is inherently ever going to meet 'my' standards. But I also think it is totally irrational and ridiculous to make claims about The Oregonian when most of those claims would apply to any paper around the country serving a city like Portland. In some ways one could easily make the case, that in terms of quality, The Oregonian might actually surpass some commensurate publications from other locations.
The alarmist bitch-fest of the 'alternative' local papers is no better and hardly equals the quality of The New York Times. Those 'alternative' local publications are about as subversive as shopping at American Apparel instead of The Gap.
-
>I don't buy The Oregonian or read it, because I don't think the quality of a paper from a city or state of this size is inherently ever going to meet 'my' standards.
But I would read it - and buy it - if it offered good state and local coverage. I'd read it - and buy it - if it offered investigative journalism on Oregon stories, and did more than protect powerful interests and reprint corporate press releases.
And I don't think that's asking too much of local reporters; I'm sure that many are also frustrated with the situation - and more than up to the task.
But the corporate owners of this paper, in collaboration with their advertising partners, won't let them do real, and valuable, work.
I agree that this situation isn't unique to Oregon. And I agree that "alternative" papers are often about as alternative as American Apparel (vs. the Gap)..!
But as an Oregonian, I'm certainly not mourning the slow death of this "newspaper." The owners (and some editors) freely chose this path...
-
I disagree with the original comment stating the Oregonian would still have a hard time regardless, etc...
Yes, the Oregonian would still have a difficult transition to the "digital age" - but it would certainly be much better off if it was of better quality and were more respected in the community as a whole.
As a sidenote, The NY Times does fairly well in the Portland area due to the poor quality of the Oregonian. I see alot of NY Times delivery boxes on mailboxes in my neighborhood...
jeff
-
Sure, if The Oregonian was the NYTimes more people would be reading it! If it was so easy to achieve the quality of the NYTimes then it would have loads of competitors.
Lots of people also read The New Yorker in Portland, when they could be reading the Portland Monthly. It is great for us to try to achieve a great local paper, but it is unreasonable and impractical to suggest that we have the resources to easily do so---or that quality is the overriding reason of The Oregonian's problems, especially when papers around the country are facing similar fates.
-
What I am saying is that being not respected in their own community as a quality newspaper certainly does help them fall faster....
They aren't great. They aren't even fair.... This city is full of fairly intellectual people, they definitely have lots of room to improve in terms of their quality and journalistic integrity.
jeff
-
There's definitely a role and a place for fine journalism. I just don't want to fill my house with paper to get it.
I download NYT & NPR stories on my iPhone. I get NPR and OPB feeds on facebook. I get the NYT and Economist headlines via email. And when I have a few moments in between things, I peruse them. I would gladly pay for content--if it were set up like iTunes. I'd even pay a membership, like I do with OPB. Because good reporting is Very Important to me. Just give me a means of giving you money.
Oregonlive does not put The Oregonian's best foot forward, journalistically. If The O is the cadillac brand of Oregon journalism, shouldn't it present itself that way? Why does it feel like a strip mall instead?
-
The Oregonian has been full of the good and the bad, journalism-wise and editorial-wise. This is true for all newspapers. But it was the paper we had and believe me, when I traveled a lot for my job I saw a lot of local newspapers that were truly fish wrappers. We Portlanders were lucky. But time marches on. We stopped the weekday subscription because they started to pile up, unread. We were getting our news from other sources( including Oregonlive). We recently stopped the Sunday Oregonian as well.
Since then we have gotten calls from time to time asking us to reconsider. These seem to be from people who really work there and I am sure they are literally hoping to save their jobs. I am always polite but firm. it's sad. There are a couple of small specialty magazines from which we have gotten the same kinds of calls. It is painful to see this, but we're happy with the electronic media and hope the many fine writers and journalists find new homes.
-
The aper should be free.
The paper should have more original foreign news
The paper has too much advertising.
The paper piles up.
The paper should deliver printed news faster than electronic news can travel.
Folks, just read all that criticism, much of it nonsense. The "greedy"paper is, in fact, in danger of going broke. It has gone through three major shakeups from merger, to expansion to desperate cutbacks in the last three decades. In all that time it has been trying desperately to figure out what readers want, and it appears that the answer is that most people don't want to read. And they certainly don't want to read serious, complex articles.
It is no surprise Peter Bhatia can't spell out the future of daily journalism. Hell, it is going out on a limb to say there is such a thing.
-
I won't critisize against it.. I don't think that's asking too much of local reporters; and lets see what happens next..
-
Comments are now closed.
Am orginally from Baker City and I have long found that its full of AP blurbs and then filled with what little news is going on in Baker County. The real news paper is The Record Courier, it not only has the news from Baker County, but from Power Valley to Sumpter and everywhere in between. The only paper that I subscribe to is the Record Courier. Its worth the money. Then I moved to The Dalles and never subscribed to that local paper, would always read online, gave me more and worth it. Seems to me that its worth to save your money and read the online version of your local paper. With the way the economy is going, subscribe to a paper that gives you the whole scoop, not just one filled with AP Blurbs and the like.